[697] Paper The battle for Azerbaijan Azeri Perspectives on the Observation of the 2005 Parliamentary Elections and the Post-Election Period Stina Torjesen Indra Øverland [Eds] No. 697 – 2006 Norwegian Institute Norsk of International Utenrikspolitisk Affairs Institutt Utgiver: NUPI Copyright: © Norsk Utenrikspolitisk Institutt 2006 ISSN: 0800 - 0018 ISBN: 82 7002 124 5 Alle synspunkter står for forfatternes regning. De må ikke tolkes som uttrykk for oppfatninger som kan tillegges Norsk Utenrikspolitisk Institutt. Artiklene kan ikke reproduseres – helt eller delvis – ved trykking, fotokopiering eller på annen måte uten tillatelse fra forfatterne. Any views expressed in this publication are those of the author. They should not be interpreted as reflecting the views of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs. The text may not be printed in part or in full without the permission of the author. Besøksadresse: C.J. Hambrosplass 2d Addresse: Postboks 8159 Dep. 0033 Oslo Internett: www.nupi.no E-post: [email protected] Fax: [+ 47] 22 36 21 82 Tel: [+ 47] 22 99 40 00 The battle for Azerbaijan Azeri Perspectives on the Observation of the 2005 Parliamentary Elections and the Post-Election Period Stina Torjesen and Indra Øverland [Eds] Copy-edited and proof red by: Victoria Carter Editing assistant: Fredrik Eugen Christiansen [Abstract] This report seeks to highlight the role of international observer missions of the 9 November 2005 parliamentary election in Azerbaijan. It also presents in-depth assessments of the pre- and post-election situation in the country. The six articles that are presented in the volume have been produced by leading scholars or development practitioners in Azerbai- jan. The report forms part of the ‘Network for Election Observation and Exchange’. This is project that is supported by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Battle for Azerbaijan: Azeri Perspectives on the Observation of the 2005 Parliamentary Elections and the Post-Election Period Contents Stina Torjesen & Indra Øverland INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………3 Leila Alieva INTERNATIONAL OBSERVATION MISSIONS: ASSESSMENTS OF THE 2005 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS…………….………..…11 Ulvi Amirbekov FRAMEWORKS FOR ELECTION OBSERVATION IN AZERBAIJAN: INSTITUTIONAL IMPROVEMENTS BUT LITTLE IMPACT?…...…………………………………………………………..45 Zafar Guliev PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS IN AZERBAIJAN: DEMOCRATIC EXPECTATIONS VERSUS IMITATED REALITIES……………..…59 Zardusht Alizade THE 2005 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS: A MIRROR OF POLITICS AND SOCIETY IN AZERBAIJAN………………………..77 Rustam Seyidov THE POST-ELECTION SITUATION: WHO RULES AZERBAIJAN?…………………...…………………………………...99 Torgrul Juvarly & Ali Abasov ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF THE PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS: SYMBIOSIS OF POLITICS AND ECONOMICS …...117 INTRODUCTION Stina Torjesen & Indra Øverland Azerbaijan’s parliamentary elections in November 2005 became an arena where domestic and – according to the contributors to this volume – interna- tional actors battled for influence and control, using both formal and infor- mal means of contestation. This report highlights the role of international observer missions in the 2005 election processes, and presents in-depth as- sessments of the pre- and post-election situation in Azerbaijan. The six articles presented in this volume have been produced by leading scholars and development practitioners in Azerbaijan. This is the second scholarly publication within the project ‘Network for Election Observation and Exchange’, which focuses on Moldova, the Caucasus and Central Asia. The key aims of the project have been to enhance the participation of ob- servers from the region in international observation missions and to facilitate research on the role of election observation in democratic development. Fur- ther information on the project is presented at the end of this introduction. The 2005 elections in Azerbaijan are interesting for several reasons. First, the conduct of the elections sheds light on the level of democratisation in a country. In addition, assessments of oil-rich Azerbaijan offer interesting in- sight on the relationship between energy wealth and democratisation. Sec- ond, the elections in Azerbaijan received considerable international atten- tion. They were seen as a test case of whether the wave of regime change that had affected Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan would spread to other countries in the region. International actors, regional and global powers and multilateral organisations, were thought to play important formal and infor- mal roles before and after the elections. Third, the role of Russia in the elec- tion process was particularly interesting. For the first time, a large number of Russian observers served within the Office for Democratic Institution and Human Rights (ODIHR) election observation mission; Russia’s distinct in- volvement in the election process seemed to signal new trends in Russia’s strategy towards observation and observation missions in the post-Soviet space. Fourth and finally, the case of Azerbaijan also highlights the meth- odological and technical aspects of election observation. Among other things, there was extensive – and arguably problematic – use of exit polls. Azerbaijan has also recently introduced a comprehensive election law, which significantly altered the administration and conduct of the elections. This introduction briefly discusses some of the points mentioned above, indicating key questions and challenges for election observation that arise Assessments of the Parliamentary Elections in March 2005 4 from a study of Azerbaijan’s parliamentary elections. Then follows an out- line of each of the six articles presented in this volume. The introduction ends by offering further information about the ‘Network for Election Obser- vation and Exchange’ A common theme in assessments of the elections in Azerbaijan has been the relevance of international actors to domestic political processes in the country. Multilateral organisations such as the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and the Council of Europe (CoE) – both of which list Azerbaijan among their member-states – have been particularly prominent. Considerable attention has also been devoted to the activities of key regional and global powers with an interest in the affairs of Azerbaijan, the most significant ones being Iran, Russia, Turkey and the USA. Analyti- cal perspectives premised on geopolitics are often employed in order to make sense of the actions of multilateral organisations and foreign powers towards Azerbaijan. Arguably, however, the case of international rivalry over the election outcome in Azerbaijan highlights both strengths and weak- nesses of a geopolitical analytical perspective. Geopolitics is concerned with the impact on interstate relations of the spatial dispositions of continents and oceans and the distribution of natural and human resources (Agnew, 2003). States with the greatest material capa- bilities are most likely to survive in the international system. This triggers a competition for resources on a global scale by the most powerful states. Azerbaijan is seen as a country where there is a strong likelihood of strategic rivalry for control and influence by external states – due to its position as an energy producer and energy transmitter, as well its increasingly important military strategic location, i.e. proximity to Iran and to military theatres in the Middle East and Central Asia and its location on Russia’s southern bor- der. A key premise of the geopolitical perspective is the assumption that states are unitary and coherent actors that express and implement one unified strategy. Nation states, rather than international organisations or other trans- national actors, are given analytical priority. Assessments of Azerbaijan and the elections that have used geopolitics as the analytical frame have highlighted the competition between Russia, the USA and powers as a central aspect of the ‘battle for Azerbaijan’ during the 2005 election period. It is certainly true that both the USA and Russia pro- actively engaged with actors in Azerbaijan before and after the elections. However, there are significant weaknesses in explaining the actions under- taken by these and other actors solely in a geopolitical perspective. Azerbai- jan had been a problem for Russia since 1993. The country had refused to be part of Russian-sponsored (hegemonic) multilateral organisations like the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO), and had used other powers (Turkey and the USA) to counterbalance Russia’s influence. In other words, Azerbaijan under presidents Heidar and Ilham Aliev had not been a loyal ally. Russia had been unable to realise many of its strategic interests towards the country, such as control over production and transport of oil and gas. Why, then, should Russia decide to give active and substantial support to Ilham Aliev’s factions in the parliamentary elections of 2005? Why not sup- port factions that could guarantee better future terms for Russian interests? Assessments of the Parliamentary Elections in March 2005 5 Why back a political leadership with proven past and present links with what is generally regarded as a key adversary of Russia in the region – the USA? Geopolitical assessments do not provide adequate answers to these ques- tions. Moreover, geopolitical frameworks tend to underplay the role of actors from within the country when accounting for why events unfold as they do. There is little tangible evidence available, which could